1. Field of the Invention
The security system proposed by this invention concerns the implementation of a motorized shackle/bolt-type lock and its mated handheld key(s), both of which are unequivocally programmable and erasable by means of an electronic computer for use in mobile commerce systems.
2. Description of the Prior Art
The notions of private property and the need for the protection thereof have initiated a long and somewhat torturous evolution through purely mechanical efforts to present-day electromechanical versions. The goal has been to improve the security of private property--(personal and industrial)--through the confusion and/or frustration of persons not having authorized access to such property. In recent times, the chief method of achieving this purpose has been to implement higher and higher orders of complexity of an electronic-control nature into portable keys and hardened mechanical locks, while still preserving sufficient simplicity to accommodate an authorized user. Some in the past have overemphasized this latter aspect of convenience with inventions relating to keyless security systems, such as U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,801,742 to O'Brien et al; 3,805,246 to Colucci et al.; 4,130,738 to Sandstedt; and 4,206,491 to Ligman et al. These represent honest and noble efforts directed to the access/storage of a digital code in various types of electronic memories contained in only the locking devices. It is readily apparent that the party for whom convenience is being optimized in these security systems is the person requiring immediate access to the locked contents (such as an inspector or receiver of goods). They are not designed to maximize the position of the party to whom shipped goods once belonged or to whom they may still belong (such as a freight shipper, manufacturer or freight company), and this fact is especially true of the stand-alone systems envisioned by the Colucci et al. and Ligman et al. patents.
Systems deployed along the lines of O'Brien et al. and Sandstedt probably go a bit too far in accommodating a shipper's convenience and security at the expense of complete loss of autonomy at the local receiver's end. These and other prior art keyless security systems, whether or not processor-based, do not provide for that first and fundamental obstacle to an unauthorized party; namely, the physical acquisition of a key-type device. Without the existence of a unique key both physically and electronically matched to the corresponding lock, an intruder is immediately free to improvise his own access means and is brought that much closer, temporally, to the successful violation of the security system.
There have been countless attempts of providing keyed security systems; however none of the known available systems offer unequivocal security in mobile commerce systems.
For example, some, such as U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,736,676 to Schachter et al., 3,800,284 to Zucker et al., and 4,257,030 to Bruhin et al., rely upon a high degree of dependence on purely mechanical relationships among their keys and locks, and thus they are quire subject to physical abuse, wear, and other damage. Additionally, none is easily adaptable to mobile interstate commerce systems because the locks of these systems are not portable. They are powered by a stationary AC source, and at best they would be self-powered only through the use of a clumsy integrated battery pack. This same problem of lack of portability of the critical locking device--and therefore the decreased applicability to widespread geographic dispersion--also plagues the security systems of other prior art systems such as U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,207,555 to Trombly, 4,189,712 to Lemelson, 3,944,976 to France, 3,845,361 to Watase, 3,821,704 to Sabsay, and 3,787,714 to Resnick.
Many of the prior art efforts have led to an overcompensation in the matter of local user autonomy divorced from the participation of the central facility. Specifically, arrangements such the systems of France, Trombly, Sabsay, and U.S. Pat. No. 3,859,634 to Perron et al. permit the easy alteration of the encoded memory of the locking device and/or key.
Several inventors, have complicated their security systems through the implementation of integrated-electromagnetic-radiation techniques. The systems of Resnick et al. and Lemelson require the active use of such single-wavelength techniques as a prominent matter of course in the operation of the lock-opening mechanism. The pursuit of matters along this particular direction leads to the unfortunate situation whereby a local user/key holder is forced to have in his possession a device which cooperates with or generates the appropriate electromagnetic radiation. Such proliferation of this type of equipment in local hands virtually mandates a higher degree of sophistication and opportunity for unauthorized persons. Another use incorporating electromagnetic-radiation methods is found in Sanstedt who only addresses the programming aspects of locking devices.
As to the actual cooperation of the key and lock in everyday usage, it is important--as a matter of user convenience and time savings for the key holder--that neither the key nor the lock memories be completely disabled (erased) by a failed attempt to interface and mate the two as is the case as the system of U.S. Pat. No. 3,911,397 to Freeny, Jr. It is highly probable that one key located at a receiver's depot may be required to open a plurality of locks where nothing directed to the enhancement of security per se would be advanced by such a dire functional disablement due the by-chance mismatching of a uniquely encoded key and lock. At best, such a failure should result in the lock's not being opened; the key user should be free to make further attempts at other locks without having to implement a reprogramming procedure after each said failed attempt.
It is therefore the object of this invention to integrate many of the efforts in the prior technology relating to security systems by providing for a new security system and method which has the following characteristics:
(a) Widespread geographic adaptability for use within the interstate commerce system, especially among trucking lines and railroads;
(b) Versatility and portability of both keys and locks with the former being the operational power source for the latter;
(c) Encodable complex cipher memories for both keys and locks with the encoding of the latter possible only at a centralized factory;
(d) A key which is encodable at a centralized factory and reprogrammable repeatedly via remote telemetric means;
(e) An unambiguous programming-and-erasing scheme for at least the locking device whereby two completely different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation are oppositely and respectively employed; and finally,
(f) A system and procedure capable of programming a great number of keys and locks and further capable of storing such appropriate coding information in at least one centralized factory location on a complete basis (master) and in at least one other location on a partial basis (local subordinate).